Jim P Tol1, Max Dahele2, Patricia Doornaert2, Ben J Slotman2, Wilko F A R Verbakel2. 1. Department of Radiotherapy, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: j.tol@vumc.nl. 2. Department of Radiotherapy, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Different planning protocols may define varying planning target volume (PTV) dose criteria. We investigated the hypothesis that this could result in differences in organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Volumetric modulated arc therapy plans were created for ten locally advanced head and neck cancer patients following PTV criteria specified by the RTOG, EORTC and institutional (VUmc) protocols. Resulting plans were evaluated on the basis of the homogeneity index, calculated for the boost/elective PTVs as HIB/HIE=100%*(D2%-D98%)/D50% and mean dose to individual and composite salivary (compsal) and swallowing (compswal) OARs. RESULTS: RTOG plans were the most homogeneous, with mean HIB of 8.2±0.9%, compared to 9.5±1.0%/11.6±1.5% for the VUmc/EORTC plans. EORTC plans provided most OAR sparing, with compsal/compswal doses of 24.6±7.7/22.9±4.2Gy, compared to 32.2±9.7/29.9±4.2Gy and 28.4±8.1/24.7±5.3Gy for RTOG and VUmc, respectively. EORTC provided 7.2/7.7Gy mean dose reductions to the contra/ipsilateral parotid glands compared to RTOG. CONCLUSIONS: Different planning protocols resulted in different levels of PTV dose homogeneity. We observed differences of up to ⩾7Gy in composite and individual mean OAR doses. This could influence rates of toxicity and should be taken into account when comparing clinical studies. A consensus should be reached between major trial groups on appropriate PTV parameters.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Different planning protocols may define varying planning target volume (PTV) dose criteria. We investigated the hypothesis that this could result in differences in organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Volumetric modulated arc therapy plans were created for ten locally advanced head and neck cancerpatients following PTV criteria specified by the RTOG, EORTC and institutional (VUmc) protocols. Resulting plans were evaluated on the basis of the homogeneity index, calculated for the boost/elective PTVs as HIB/HIE=100%*(D2%-D98%)/D50% and mean dose to individual and composite salivary (compsal) and swallowing (compswal) OARs. RESULTS: RTOG plans were the most homogeneous, with mean HIB of 8.2±0.9%, compared to 9.5±1.0%/11.6±1.5% for the VUmc/EORTC plans. EORTC plans provided most OAR sparing, with compsal/compswal doses of 24.6±7.7/22.9±4.2Gy, compared to 32.2±9.7/29.9±4.2Gy and 28.4±8.1/24.7±5.3Gy for RTOG and VUmc, respectively. EORTC provided 7.2/7.7Gy mean dose reductions to the contra/ipsilateral parotid glands compared to RTOG. CONCLUSIONS: Different planning protocols resulted in different levels of PTV dose homogeneity. We observed differences of up to ⩾7Gy in composite and individual mean OAR doses. This could influence rates of toxicity and should be taken into account when comparing clinical studies. A consensus should be reached between major trial groups on appropriate PTV parameters.
Authors: Jim P Tol; Max Dahele; Jarkko Peltola; Janne Nord; Ben J Slotman; Wilko F A R Verbakel Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-04-01 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Oliver Blanck; Lei Wang; Wolfgang Baus; Jimm Grimm; Thomas Lacornerie; Joakim Nilsson; Sergii Luchkovskyi; Isabel Palazon Cano; Zhenyu Shou; Myriam Ayadi; Harald Treuer; Romain Viard; Frank-Andre Siebert; Mark K H Chan; Guido Hildebrandt; Jürgen Dunst; Detlef Imhoff; Stefan Wurster; Robert Wolff; Pantaleo Romanelli; Eric Lartigau; Robert Semrau; Scott G Soltys; Achim Schweikard Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2016-05-08 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Vladimir Feygelman; Kujtim Latifi; Mark Bowers; Kevin Greco; Eduardo G Moros; Max Isacson; Agnes Angerud; Jimmy Caudell Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 2.243
Authors: J Krayenbuehl; M Zamburlini; S Ghandour; M Pachoud; S Tanadini-Lang; J Tol; M Guckenberger; W F A R Verbakel Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-09-10 Impact factor: 3.481